-=Rebel XSi / 450D Users Unite (2)

Salma wrote in post #9509307
Luvsadog2 absolutely beautiful shots!

Thank you, Salma -- I'm glad you enjoyed them

Miss Frizzle wrote in post #9507921
So, should I just aim it on the side of the lightbox? It's made of white foam board.

Just shoot as you have with nothing in the whitebox, then use that as the custom white balance, the whole box is white so should be ok. you will probebly need to put something in there first for the cam to focus then remove it before you take the pic.

luvsadog2 wrote in post #9509545
Thank you, Salma -- I'm glad you enjoyed them

I loved them

Karizmatik wrote in post #9509862

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

How do you PP your photos?

Tripoli wrote in post #9508908
Hey guys, Im new to the forum here and I have a question. What is your opinions on the 50mm lens for the 450D? I already own a 18-55mm Lens and was looking into getting another lens and I came across the 50mm lens (becuase of its cheap price). I mainly photograph Buildings

The 50mm 1.8 is regarded as one of the best for buck lenses, the pics are great from it. for the price you cannot go wrong.
Dont know if it would be worth it for building over what you already have as it will be equivelent to a 80mm fixed lens.

at least with the one you already own you can zoom in or out a little to get what you want.

If i was going to get a new cheap lens i would go for something like the Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM, this is also a great lens for the price, make sure its the 3.4 though and not the other one.

Good morning fellas. Do you guys think I should get 50mm 1.8 if i will be having 17-55? Is it worth getting 2? or just 17-55?

Nope, haven't touched my 50 since getting the 17-55. The 17-55 is utterly brilliant.

So pretty much 17-55 Will cover the same things as the 50mm. And there is no point spending extra 100$? I will be mostly shooting, portraits, and weddings.

Well, there's certainly point to it as it lets you open up to 1.8 which could be very useful in low light. 50mm on a crop may be a bit too close for portraits but at $100 you could buy one, try it out and then flog it for very little loss if it doesn't work out. For me, the 17-55 is so sharp across the range and at all apertures that I just don't really need the 50 unless I want really shallow dof or it's very low light. Put it this way, seeing as the 50 is so cheap and so small I carry it with me "just in case!"

Trixster! wrote in post #9510316
Well, there's certainly point to it as it lets you open up to 1.8 which could be very useful in low light. 50mm on a crop may be a bit too close for portraits but at $100 you could buy one, try it out and then flog it for very little loss if it doesn't work out. For me, the 17-55 is so sharp across the range and at all apertures that I just don't really need the 50 unless I want really shallow dof or it's very low light. Put it this way, seeing as the 50 is so cheap and so small I carry it with me "just in case!"

Yeah there is a point for sure the price tag LOL!!! In Canada it has a price tag of $1200.
Ouch!!!! I purchased the 50mm 1,8 for just that reason. If I had money to blow I would own the 17-55 in a heartbeat.

^ WOW!

Trixter WOW!

Trixter, Very nice shot.